KEEPING IT REAL: DO IMPACT SIMULATIONS REFLECT ACTUAL DISTURBANCES (AND DOES IT MATTER)?

Over the last nine years - after the first workshop on simulated impacts- a few publications have appeared in the scientific literature. While this is significant progress, some questions main unresolved.
1.Realistic trajectories of impact: Depending on the nature of the simulated impact, different methods can increase realism. Methods include taxa-based impacts, individual-based impacts or random impacts
2.Stochasticity: Despite widely available datasets and better predictive models, stochastic fluctuations in the ecological assemblages are still the largest hurdle to successful bioassessment. Despite the importance of realistic levels of stochasticity, achieving this can be tricky.
3.The circular nature of simulations: Usually, simulations are either based on random impacts or rules about the sensitivity of certain taxa. This, however will influence the outcome of a methods comparison. Random impacts will automatically favour generalised methods, while targeted impacts will favour specific metrics.

In this paper, I will highlight these limitations and suggest possible solutions based on published and new examples.